Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
Uh Turd, those are the facts. This team was on par with ty's 0-12 team when Pete took over. Cyress was that bad. This team would have won 4 games last year with Sark and maybe 5-6 next year. Those are more facts.
Puppy, puppy, puppy....That's just FS and you know it. Sark left the cupboard bare in spots, no doubt, but Ty had no D worth a shit, even with good players on the team, and couldn't hold a candle to all the D studs on CP's first, well-coached defense at UW.
I like and share your optimism, Pup. But you can't keep up this "Move along, nothing to see here" about the last 15 years. We all know the difference between hype and results. Well, most of us, anyway.
How many games did Sark win with Ty's 0-12 team (basically same players)? Next topic?
Sark won 5 in 2009. And CP won 8 his first year w/"Sark's guys." You wrote that CP's 8 win 2014 team was the same as Ty's 0-12 team. And now you're saying 5=8.
I think I know what you're trying to say, but your synapses just aren't firing. At long last, your point is that CP is better than Sark? Is that your point, Pup?
Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
Uh Turd, those are the facts. This team was on par with ty's 0-12 team when Pete took over. Cyress was that bad. This team would have won 4 games last year with Sark and maybe 5-6 next year. Those are more facts.
Puppy, puppy, puppy....That's just FS and you know it. Sark left the cupboard bare in spots, no doubt, but Ty had no D worth a shit, even with good players on the team, and couldn't hold a candle to all the D studs on CP's first, well-coached defense at UW.
I like and share your optimism, Pup. But you can't keep up this "Move along, nothing to see here" about the last 15 years. We all know the difference between hype and results. Well, most of us, anyway.
How many games did Sark win with Ty's 0-12 team (basically same players)? Next topic?
Sark won 5 in 2009. And CP won 8 his first year w/"Sark's guys." You wrote that CP's 8 win 2014 team was the same as Ty's 0-12 team. And now you're saying 5=8.
I think I know what you're trying to say, but your synapses just aren't firing.
Well Pete is a better coach obviously. Both took over shit teams. Sark inherited the better team, Pete did more with less.
Turd, ok points but Pete goes as his talent goes. As they improve so will his record. (Jimmys and joes not x's and o's) ever heard that? That's HEAD FUCKING COACH-speak, NOT message board fags. You dipshits never cease to amaze me.
Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
Uh Turd, those are the facts. This team was on par with ty's 0-12 team when Pete took over. Cyress was that bad. This team would have won 4 games last year with Sark and maybe 5-6 next year. Those are more facts.
Puppy, puppy, puppy....That's just FS and you know it. Sark left the cupboard bare in spots, no doubt, but Ty had no D worth a shit, even with good players on the team, and couldn't hold a candle to all the D studs on CP's first, well-coached defense at UW.
I like and share your optimism, Pup. But you can't keep up this "Move along, nothing to see here" about the last 15 years. We all know the difference between hype and results. Well, most of us, anyway.
How many games did Sark win with Ty's 0-12 team (basically same players)? Next topic?
Sark won 5 in 2009. And CP won 8 his first year w/"Sark's guys." You wrote that CP's 8 win 2014 team was the same as Ty's 0-12 team. And now you're saying 5=8.
I think I know what you're trying to say, but your synapses just aren't firing.
Well Pete is a better coach obviously. Both took over shit teams. Sark inherited the better team, Pete did more with less.
LOL.
This faggot thinks Sark inherited more talent than Peterman did. So even though Puppy praised Sark for years, he now thinks Ty is a better recruiter than Sark.
UW plays a nine game schedule. Hope this helps. The three faggots they open with now don't count.
Out of those nine games two are tough pending USC getting a real coach or UCLA not imploding. That would be three. Fuck ASU and the rest of the shit in this league.
Going 7-2 in league would be a huge improvement but would likely still be a 3rd place Finnish, meaning no game against Finland for the gold
Beat Oregon, Stanford and win the North. Nothing else matters
UW plays a nine game schedule. Hope this helps. The three faggots they open with now don't count.
Out of those nine games two are tough pending USC getting a real coach or UCLA not imploding. That would be three. Fuck ASU and the rest of the shit in this league.
Going 7-2 in league would be a huge improvement but would likely still be a 3rd place Finnish, meaning no game against Finland for the gold
Beat Oregon, Stanford and win the North. Nothing else matters
Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
Uh Turd, those are the facts. This team was on par with ty's 0-12 team when Pete took over. Cyress was that bad. This team would have won 4 games last year with Sark and maybe 5-6 next year. Those are more facts.
Puppy, puppy, puppy....That's just FS and you know it. Sark left the cupboard bare in spots, no doubt, but Ty had no D worth a shit, even with good players on the team, and couldn't hold a candle to all the D studs on CP's first, well-coached defense at UW.
I like and share your optimism, Pup. But you can't keep up this "Move along, nothing to see here" about the last 15 years. We all know the difference between hype and results. Well, most of us, anyway.
How many games did Sark win with Ty's 0-12 team (basically same players)? Next topic?
Sark won 5 in 2009. And CP won 8 his first year w/"Sark's guys." You wrote that CP's 8 win 2014 team was the same as Ty's 0-12 team. And now you're saying 5=8.
I think I know what you're trying to say, but your synapses just aren't firing.
Well Pete is a better coach obviously. Both took over shit teams. Sark inherited the better team, Pete did more with less.
Talia Crichton and Nate Fellner started as true freshmen on the 09 team. Greg Christine and Nick Wood started games on the OL. Quinten Richardson and Adam Long started opposite Trufant at CB.
The 09 team was better in places, but Petersen inherited a better situation. I am somewhat optimistic, but Petersen's offenses have sucked for too long to simply ignore.
For a guy who thinks of himself as a football expert, I would expect more honest analysis Pup. I'm disappointed.
Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong.
You are not wrong.
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.
Good stuff Billy, and well put. This is how dawg fans used to think. They had pride in their team, their head coach. Then boofs like J, Nacho, Race came along.
Well, you can't blame them for not taking pride in 3 or 4 of these buffoons
Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong.
You are not wrong.
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.
It's like 2011 all over again.
And if the result is similar to 2011, they should hire a new coach. They won't, but they should.
Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
Uh Turd, those are the facts. This team was on par with ty's 0-12 team when Pete took over. Cyress was that bad. This team would have won 4 games last year with Sark and maybe 5-6 next year. Those are more facts.
Puppy, puppy, puppy....That's just FS and you know it. Sark left the cupboard bare in spots, no doubt, but Ty had no D worth a shit, even with good players on the team, and couldn't hold a candle to all the D studs on CP's first, well-coached defense at UW.
I like and share your optimism, Pup. But you can't keep up this "Move along, nothing to see here" about the last 15 years. We all know the difference between hype and results. Well, most of us, anyway.
How many games did Sark win with Ty's 0-12 team (basically same players)? Next topic?
Sark won 5 in 2009. And CP won 8 his first year w/"Sark's guys." You wrote that CP's 8 win 2014 team was the same as Ty's 0-12 team. And now you're saying 5=8.
I think I know what you're trying to say, but your synapses just aren't firing.
Well Pete is a better coach obviously. Both took over shit teams. Sark inherited the better team, Pete did more with less.
Talia Crichton and Nate Fellner started as true freshmen on the 09 team. Greg Christine and Nick Wood started games on the OL. Quinten Richardson and Adam Long started opposite Trufant at CB.
The 09 team was better in places, but Petersen inherited a better situation. I am somewhat optimistic, but Petersen's offenses have sucked for too long to simply ignore.
For a guy who thinks of himself as a football expert, I would expect more honest analysis Pup. I'm disappointed.
You'll never believe this, but Pup sucks at football analysis because he's just another Doog who hates facts and winners.
Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
Uh Turd, those are the facts. This team was on par with ty's 0-12 team when Pete took over. Cyress was that bad. This team would have won 4 games last year with Sark and maybe 5-6 next year. Those are more facts.
Puppy, puppy, puppy....That's just FS and you know it. Sark left the cupboard bare in spots, no doubt, but Ty had no D worth a shit, even with good players on the team, and couldn't hold a candle to all the D studs on CP's first, well-coached defense at UW.
I like and share your optimism, Pup. But you can't keep up this "Move along, nothing to see here" about the last 15 years. We all know the difference between hype and results. Well, most of us, anyway.
How many games did Sark win with Ty's 0-12 team (basically same players)? Next topic?
Sark won 5 in 2009. And CP won 8 his first year w/"Sark's guys." You wrote that CP's 8 win 2014 team was the same as Ty's 0-12 team. And now you're saying 5=8.
I think I know what you're trying to say, but your synapses just aren't firing.
Well Pete is a better coach obviously. Both took over shit teams. Sark inherited the better team, Pete did more with less.
Talia Crichton and Nate Fellner started as true freshmen on the 09 team. Greg Christine and Nick Wood started games on the OL. Quinten Richardson and Adam Long started opposite Trufant at CB.
The 09 team was better in places, but Petersen inherited a better situation. I am somewhat optimistic, but Petersen's offenses have sucked for too long to simply ignore.
For a guy who thinks of himself as a football expert, I would expect more honest analysis Pup. I'm disappointed.
Lets look at the offense 55. We are arguing similar points on opposite sides of the ball. Thing is, sark had the clearly better offense and a serviceable defense. Pete had a serviceable defense (3 1st rounders, little else) and a fucking HORRIFIC offense left by Sark. Take a long look at both teams and check the fuck back. Worst husky offense ive ever seen. Yes, worse than Rainbow Ronnie's. ( Locker did play that year, just got hurt. Rainbow could at least complete a forward pass, Cyress could not.
Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
Uh Turd, those are the facts. This team was on par with ty's 0-12 team when Pete took over. Cyress was that bad. This team would have won 4 games last year with Sark and maybe 5-6 next year. Those are more facts.
Puppy, puppy, puppy....That's just FS and you know it. Sark left the cupboard bare in spots, no doubt, but Ty had no D worth a shit, even with good players on the team, and couldn't hold a candle to all the D studs on CP's first, well-coached defense at UW.
I like and share your optimism, Pup. But you can't keep up this "Move along, nothing to see here" about the last 15 years. We all know the difference between hype and results. Well, most of us, anyway.
How many games did Sark win with Ty's 0-12 team (basically same players)? Next topic?
Sark won 5 in 2009. And CP won 8 his first year w/"Sark's guys." You wrote that CP's 8 win 2014 team was the same as Ty's 0-12 team. And now you're saying 5=8.
I think I know what you're trying to say, but your synapses just aren't firing.
Well Pete is a better coach obviously. Both took over shit teams. Sark inherited the better team, Pete did more with less.
Talia Crichton and Nate Fellner started as true freshmen on the 09 team. Greg Christine and Nick Wood started games on the OL. Quinten Richardson and Adam Long started opposite Trufant at CB.
The 09 team was better in places, but Petersen inherited a better situation. I am somewhat optimistic, but Petersen's offenses have sucked for too long to simply ignore.
For a guy who thinks of himself as a football expert, I would expect more honest analysis Pup. I'm disappointed.
Lets look at the offense 55. We are arguing similar points on opposite sides of the ball. Thing is, sark had the clearly better offense and a serviceable defense. Pete had a serviceable defense (3 1st rounders, little else) and a fucking HORRIFIC offense left by Sark. Take a long look at both teams and check the fuck back. Worst husky offense ive ever seen. Yes, worse than Rainbow Ronnie's. ( Locker did play that year, just got hurt. Rainbow could at least complete a forward pass, Cyress could not.
Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
Uh Turd, those are the facts. This team was on par with ty's 0-12 team when Pete took over. Cyress was that bad. This team would have won 4 games last year with Sark and maybe 5-6 next year. Those are more facts.
Puppy, puppy, puppy....That's just FS and you know it. Sark left the cupboard bare in spots, no doubt, but Ty had no D worth a shit, even with good players on the team, and couldn't hold a candle to all the D studs on CP's first, well-coached defense at UW.
I like and share your optimism, Pup. But you can't keep up this "Move along, nothing to see here" about the last 15 years. We all know the difference between hype and results. Well, most of us, anyway.
How many games did Sark win with Ty's 0-12 team (basically same players)? Next topic?
Sark won 5 in 2009. And CP won 8 his first year w/"Sark's guys." You wrote that CP's 8 win 2014 team was the same as Ty's 0-12 team. And now you're saying 5=8.
I think I know what you're trying to say, but your synapses just aren't firing.
Well Pete is a better coach obviously. Both took over shit teams. Sark inherited the better team, Pete did more with less.
Talia Crichton and Nate Fellner started as true freshmen on the 09 team. Greg Christine and Nick Wood started games on the OL. Quinten Richardson and Adam Long started opposite Trufant at CB.
The 09 team was better in places, but Petersen inherited a better situation. I am somewhat optimistic, but Petersen's offenses have sucked for too long to simply ignore.
For a guy who thinks of himself as a football expert, I would expect more honest analysis Pup. I'm disappointed.
Lets look at the offense 55. We are arguing similar points on opposite sides of the ball. Thing is, sark had the clearly better offense and a serviceable defense. Pete had a serviceable defense (3 1st rounders, little else) and a fucking HORRIFIC offense left by Sark. Take a long look at both teams and check the fuck back. Worst husky offense ive ever seen. Yes, worse than Rainbow Ronnie's. ( Locker did play that year, just got hurt. Rainbow could at least complete a forward pass, Cyress could not.
Dig a little deeper. Cyler looked decent whenever he played under Sark. Under Petersen he was horrible. Late in the year, he looked worse than early on. He was still commonly confused. That could be accepted in the first few games, but in the Apple Cup and Bowl game?
Look beyond Miles' arm strength. Petersen has a shitty offensive system (or lack of one). The players not knowing what they are doing falls squarely on the coach. John Ross not even being used when he was the only threat was fucking retarded. The offense has been anything but organized and disciplined.
Yeah and we had a GREAT defense and only went 7-6 (4-5). The metrics are pointing up. Pete sure did a hell of a job last year.
I know you're being sarcasmic but everything you said before the final sentence is true.
Pete is good at developing talent. In game coaching? He can get better.
True and accurate. Pac12 is way tougher, top to bottom, than the MW, where many of Pete's wins were in his pocket before the game started. Context matters for expectations.
Pete's #1 quality is as a sideline coach Turd. WTF, do you even watch college football? . 92-12 before he got to UW pretty much backs it up. I watched every notable game Pete coached at bsu. Simply a master in big games. Sometimes puppy just shakes his head at some of the shit that dribbles out your cunts out here (hi kim)
92-12 proved that he could inherit the dominant program in the WAC and beat retards.
Oklahomo, Oregon two years in a row, virgin tech, tcu twice, georgia Oregon st
Bill: You did not write Oregon State. No, you didn't. My eyes deceive me, right?
I don't understand all the hurt butts about CP. I'm a fan, and I believe we're watching him grow into a top-tier Pac12 coach. But he's not there yet so stop dumping 100% of the fault on "Sark's players" or "youth." Who brought us Smiff, huh? Maybe this is the year CP breaks through to the top of the league. Great. But he got caught with his pants down around his ankles several times in '14 and '15, because the Pac12 is way tougher to navigate week in and week out than the MW. Very seldom will there be cupcakes in Pac12 league like in the MW. And that's why CP was 92-12 and not 72-30, which is still fucking great and justifies hiring him.
Jesus Christ, are we really arguing the MW is equal in strength to the Pac12?
I'm not butt hurt.m I'm Puppy's brother, remember? Some criticism is warranted and Smith probably should have been fired, and the Sark excuse (used by tons on here, but not me) is flimsy. Youth was more legitimate. I agree, he's probably 72-30 in the Pac 12.
There are people here who are just entrenched in their own narratives and thinking from 2008 or they're just trying hard to fit and be funny (usually failing) in or not rock the boat. I'm done with that shit. Tell me I'm wrong.
You are not wrong.
Except he is wrong, unless you believe 4-5 > 4-5 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4 > 5-4
Nobody knows what's going to happen. That's the fucking point. Instead of just giving up and being as negative as possible for all 8 months of the offseason, I'll choose to see what happens. Signs are pointing to something better than the usual 7 or 8 win season. If not, we know CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM States of the world. I'm on record as saying he's at least a good coach (probably not elite like Kelly or Meyer). If he's not fine. I'm wrong occasionally.
CP is just another Boise CC coach who feasted on the NM St's of the world. His record already spells that out. But He owns the Cougs, so you have that goin for ya.
Get the fuck out of here you cunt. Nobody gives a shit what some faggot Cooger thinks, even if you're right - and your track record indicates you aren't right about anything.
@Ice_Holmvik: I get it's a process. But we're still not seeing the big, important wins. UW's been "on the upswing" or "building" or "doing it the right way" ever since 2008. It's now 2016. Sark had his best, 9 win season before he left
Sark never won 9 games.
HTH.
Correct. My bad. Although he'd have won the SF Giants Bowl, or whatever it was. Was it the "Kraft Fight Hunger" Bowl? Christ. I think it was.
WTF? Revisionist history much.
Remember the Vegas bowl vs Coach Pete's BSU? How did that work out?
The script says Sark fucks up the Mormon BYU homecoming bowl game. Tui took clearly over leadership Benched Peters, and then ran the shit out of the ball...which we all know Sark would not have done on a "gameday" let alone a bowl game.
Miles was horrible. Absolutely horrific. Worst qb to ever start at Washington for a significant amount of games. The next guy was cyler miles ahead. Id take most starters at the d-2 level over him. He was that bad. Now factor in the receivers he had to throw to, the worst husky o-line to ever take the field for UW, and DWash (one of the worst RB's to ever start at Washington, his vision was nonexistent) and puppy's analysis is dead-on in terms if which HC took over the more pathetic team. Sark head experienced and NFL-quality weapons at every level, Pete had NOT FUCKING ONE nfl-quality player on offense.
Oh he had 4 on defense, that will win you 10 games. It was playoff contender Oregon vs Shelton, Peters, Shaq and kikahamora. 22 on 4!!!! Get it baabs? Turd? J? That was the reality, the shit hand Pete was dealt by Sark. Spin it anyway you want (which you have tried 100 times and to no avail). Pete was handed a fucking mess. He's now rebuilding. Give him time.
Saban would have won 7 last year, understand? Cant polish a turd there buffer. He had x amount of players. Most were junk, few were pac12 ready. Most of the TALENT were his guys, True freshmen. Takes time for HIS guys (the ones with talent) to mature. Takes 4-5 years to build enough depth with HIS guys (the ones with pac12 talent) to beat other pac12 teams with already talent and depth. Get it now?
The miracle is His guys might be ready in year 3. Thats a testament to his coaching, not a given as you put it. chuck strong has 5-star talent and is behind Petersen in year 3, with 3-4-star talent. Get it? Pete is right on track. Too late to get on board though. The puppywagon has left the station with Billy, Ice, ballsack, splitter and a few others...1st stop, husky stadium for a meeting with Rutgers. You cant climb aboard now, your chance has passed. Ill enjoy pissing on you out the window when you try and get on board.
Miles was horrible. Absolutely horrific. Worst qb to ever start at Washington for a significant amount of games. The next guy was cyler miles ahead. Id take most starters at the d-2 level over him. He was that bad. Now factor in the receivers he had to throw to, the worst husky o-line to ever take the field for UW, and DWash (one of the worst RB's to ever start at Washington, his vision was nonexistent) and puppy's analysis is dead-on in terms if which HC took over the more pathetic team. Sark head experienced and NFL-quality weapons at every level, Pete had NOT FUCKING ONE nfl-quality player on offense.
Oh he had 4 on defense, that will win you 10 games. It was playoff contender Oregon vs Shelton, Peters, Shaq and kikahamora. 22 on 4!!!! Get it baabs? Turd? J? That was the reality, the shit hand Pete was dealt by Sark. Spin it anyway you want (which you have tried 100 times and to no avail). Pete was handed a fucking mess. He's now rebuilding. Give him time.
Saban would have won 7 last year, understand? Cant polish a turd there buffer. He had x amount of players. Most were junk, few were pac12 ready. Most of the TALENT were his guys, True freshmen. Takes time for HIS guys (the ones with talent) to mature. Takes 4-5 years to build enough depth with HIS guys (the ones with pac12 talent) to beat other pac12 teams with already talent and depth. Get it now?
The miracle is His guys might be ready in year 3. Thats a testament to his coaching, not a given as you put it. chuck strong has 5-star talent and is behind Petersen in year 3, with 3-4-star talent. Get it? Pete is right on track. Too late to get on board though. The puppywagon has left the station with Billy, Ice, ballsack, splitter and a few others...1st stop, husky stadium for a meeting with Rutgers. You cant climb aboard now, your chance has passed. Ill enjoy pissing on you out the window when you try and get on board.
Miles was horrible. Absolutely horrific. Worst qb to ever start at Washington for a significant amount of games. The next guy was cyler miles ahead. Id take most starters at the d-2 level over him. He was that bad. Now factor in the receivers he had to throw to, the worst husky o-line to ever take the field for UW, and DWash (one of the worst RB's to ever start at Washington, his vision was nonexistent) and puppy's analysis is dead-on in terms if which HC took over the more pathetic team. Sark head experienced and NFL-quality weapons at every level, Pete had NOT FUCKING ONE nfl-quality player on offense.
Oh he had 4 on defense, that will win you 10 games. It was playoff contender Oregon vs Shelton, Peters, Shaq and kikahamora. 22 on 4!!!! Get it baabs? Turd? J? That was the reality, the shit hand Pete was dealt by Sark. Spin it anyway you want (which you have tried 100 times and to no avail). Pete was handed a fucking mess. He's now rebuilding. Give him time.
Saban would have won 7 last year, understand? Cant polish a turd there buffer. He had x amount of players. Most were junk, few were pac12 ready. Most of the TALENT were his guys, True freshmen. Takes time for HIS guys (the ones with talent) to mature. Takes 4-5 years to build enough depth with HIS guys (the ones with pac12 talent) to beat other pac12 teams with already talent and depth. Get it now?
The miracle is His guys might be ready in year 3. Thats a testament to his coaching, not a given as you put it. chuck strong has 5-star talent and is behind Petersen in year 3, with 3-4-star talent. Get it? Pete is right on track. Too late to get on board though. The puppywagon has left the station with Billy, Ice, ballsack, splitter and a few others...1st stop, husky stadium for a meeting with Rutgers. You cant climb aboard now, your chance has passed. Ill enjoy pissing on you out the window when you try and get on board.
Comments
I think I know what you're trying to say, but your synapses just aren't firing. At long last, your point is that CP is better than Sark? Is that your point, Pup?
That HEAD FUCKING COACH-speak is Ty's material.
This faggot thinks Sark inherited more talent than Peterman did. So even though Puppy praised Sark for years, he now thinks Ty is a better recruiter than Sark.
Out of those nine games two are tough pending USC getting a real coach or UCLA not imploding. That would be three. Fuck ASU and the rest of the shit in this league.
Going 7-2 in league would be a huge improvement but would likely still be a 3rd place Finnish, meaning no game against Finland for the gold
Beat Oregon, Stanford and win the North. Nothing else matters
The 09 team was better in places, but Petersen inherited a better situation. I am somewhat optimistic, but Petersen's offenses have sucked for too long to simply ignore.
For a guy who thinks of himself as a football expert, I would expect more honest analysis Pup. I'm disappointed.
Locker did play that year, just got hurt. Rainbow could at least complete a forward pass, Cyress could not.
Look beyond Miles' arm strength. Petersen has a shitty offensive system (or lack of one). The players not knowing what they are doing falls squarely on the coach. John Ross not even being used when he was the only threat was fucking retarded. The offense has been anything but organized and disciplined.
Remember the Vegas bowl vs Coach Pete's BSU? How did that work out?
The script says Sark fucks up the Mormon BYU homecoming bowl game. Tui took clearly over leadership Benched Peters, and then ran the shit out of the ball...which we all know Sark would not have done on a "gameday" let alone a bowl game.
Christ.
UW, and DWash (one of the worst RB's to ever start at Washington, his vision was nonexistent) and puppy's analysis is dead-on in terms if which HC took over the more pathetic team. Sark head experienced and NFL-quality weapons at every level, Pete had NOT FUCKING ONE nfl-quality player on offense.
Oh he had 4 on defense, that will win you 10 games. It was playoff contender Oregon vs Shelton, Peters, Shaq and kikahamora. 22 on 4!!!! Get it baabs? Turd? J? That was the reality, the shit hand Pete was dealt by Sark. Spin it anyway you want (which you have tried 100 times and to no avail). Pete was handed a fucking mess. He's now rebuilding. Give him time.
Saban would have won 7 last year, understand? Cant polish a turd there buffer. He had x amount of players. Most were junk, few were pac12 ready. Most of the TALENT were his guys, True freshmen. Takes time for HIS guys (the ones with talent) to mature. Takes 4-5 years to build enough depth with HIS guys (the ones with pac12 talent) to beat other pac12 teams with already talent and depth. Get it now?
The miracle is His guys might be ready in year 3. Thats a testament to his coaching, not a given as you put it. chuck strong has 5-star talent and is behind Petersen in year 3, with 3-4-star talent. Get it? Pete is right on track. Too late to get on board though. The puppywagon has left the station with Billy, Ice, ballsack, splitter and a few others...1st stop, husky stadium for a meeting with Rutgers. You cant climb aboard now, your chance has passed. Ill enjoy pissing on you out the window when you try and get on board.